Tricky statute Bared situation!

[littlej4121]

I've made a mistake!!

 

I wrote to a creditor last week, assuming that the assumed debt was statute bared, however, this seems not to be the case...

 

I received a response from the creditor saying that the statute bared hasn't come to pass as yet. It doesn't until September 2012!! Four months time...sheeesh

 

The original debt is from 2001, however, it seems that a payment had been made in sept 2006. Which means it's still active. I received a print out of three previous payments made around that time, September 2006 being the last one.

 

My question is, what might be the best way forward with this situation, and as I have now contacted them, does that mean that it's another 6 years?

 

I was considering asking them to prove that this debt is actually mine?

 

I have pasted a copy of the letter I have sent, along with some details of their response...HELP I don't want to mess this up!

 

 

this is the letter i have sent...

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

I would point out that under the limitations act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under their debt collection guidance on statute barred debt that “it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period”.

 

The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that “continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to CPUTR 2008”

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

This is a brief of the reply they have sent...

 

 

Upon our own investigations, we have confirmed this not to be the case.

 

The last payment made on the account was 19th September 2006 or the sum of £10.00, please find enclosed statement confirming this.

 

the original default was registered on the 20th November 2003 with the original credit grantor **** and the account was opened on the 14th January 2001

 

As the sis year time limit as dictated by the Limitation Act 1980 has never expired, the matter is not considered statute barred.The current balance is therefore due and payable.

 

 

Any constructive advice would be greatly welcomed!

[rebel11]

Thread has been moved to the correct forum.

[renegadeimp]

Check your bank statements, your Credit file and also ask them for proof of the payment. It seems that lately a lot of DCA's convieniently find a random one off-payment, that stop the SB. If you cant remember making the payment, then chances are they are pulling a fast one and are trying to get money from you.

 

Remember, DCA's are the **** of the earth. They will try every single trick in the book, including generating completely random and fictitious payments to try and get money. If you want, you could play letter tennis with them, replying and saying that you owe them nothing as there is no proof that they payment was every made. Send EVERYTHING by the slowest method of delivery available. £rd class etc with free proof of posting. Drag this out for the remainder of the SB time and you're done.

 

Note however, that you only do this if you are 100% sure that a payment was never made, and this means that you have solid proof. Otherwise it would be classed as debt avoidance.

 

The reason i said it was, if you are 100% sure a payment wasnt made and theyre lying, then you can call their bluff for the remainder of the SB period. The second it becomes SB, send a recorded 1st class delivery letter, and you're done. Remember, though, dont acknowledge the payment etc in writing. The second you do, you revoke the SB status.

Edited May 25, 2012 by renegadeimp

[dx100uk]

typical trick

 

as advise

 

make them PROVE who made the payment.

 

comms in writing only too!!

 

dx

[renegadeimp]

Slowest method of letter too, free proof of delivery. Remember, it's all you can afford right?

[griffin036]

Would the £10 payment they are reffering to be payment for a SAR made by yourself? (maybe even if it wasnt you could say it was) ;-)

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The SB lettter left out an important point

the sentence ''I do not acknowledge any

debt to you or any company you claim

to to rpresent''.

Also you have stated that the last payment

was made more than six years ago.

The wording of the letter in my opinion

would be seen as an admission of liability.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I agree with the Brig. I think that they could well, if they were so minded, convince a court that this isn't SB, that you are trying to spin things out, and that you have effectively acknowledged the debt.

 

We know that DCAs are not above dirty tricks, but if you give them ammunition you cannot be surprised if they shoot you with it.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I certainly would be hard put to defend

in this case.

[rebel11]

Hi little

 

What kind of debt is it?

 

Have a read of 1,2,3 and 7 in my signature, something to consider after you carried out the checks as advised by other Caggers.

[littlej4121]

Hi guys thanks a lot for you advice, seems I have got the situation all messed up. I checked my statements and there were indeed three payments made (by cheque) which would have my signature on them. This means that I will have to send them a letter asking them to sent further proof that the debt belongs to me and risk the chance of 'debt avoidance:('

[unclebulgaria67]

They won't have the cheque details. All that happens with cheques is, that they will present them for payment and eventually the physical cheque will end up back at your bank. Your bank will store them for a period, before they are destroyed.

 

So they won't have any info, other than cheque payments were received. CAG does not condone debt avoidance, but you appear to know the score.

[Bang!]

The SB lettter left out an important point

the sentence ''I do not acknowledge any

debt to you or any company you claim

to to rpresent''.

Also you have stated that the last payment

was made more than six years ago.

The wording of the letter in my opinion

would be seen as an admission of liability.

 

However, even the DCA/creditor admitted the sentence to be factually incorrect.

 

ANYWAY

 

In the original post the it says the letter went to the creditor - but through much of the thread it is referred to as DCA replying - although admittedly by other posters.

 

If a debtor made an admission here - it would not count I presume - but can any written statement not addressed to the original creditor be taken a retriggering the five/six year period?

[littlej4121]

That is exactly what I'm worrying about... from the information I have found (thanks mainly to CAG), it seems that the letter has to admit liability for the debt in some way. However, I worry that total denial was not factual enough in the first letter I sent (see copy above).

 

I have nothing to lose, at this stage. All I can do is continue with a more emphatic letter explaining my position, which is that I do not accept responsibility for this debt. I also want detailed information as to the debts history etc. I'm going to take my time, and reappraise with each response they send.

 

If they, at this time refuse to cooperate with my request effectively.Then we know why. Issue ended. If they do continue a dialogue and send me the information I require, then I continue with the dialogue, all the while explaining that I do not accept responsibility for the debt.

 

The debt has doubled since the initial purchase in 2001!

 

I do not accept responsibility for that debt.

 

Just want to thank everyone for their clear open and honest input, it's been a great help! Any further suggestion will be greatly appreciated

 

[rdm2006]

although Brig would probably know better than I, and that very important phrase is missing

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

and

 

The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

Does not sound like acknowledgement to me. Just to be sure, could you have another look brig?

Edited June 4, 2012 by rdm2006

[Bang!]

Can someone please explain the difference to me, debt avoidance v statute barred.

 

Avoidance = Procrastinating over a false reason to let a debt pass its statue barred date.

 

Statue Barred = past 5 years in Scotland and 6 years in England and Wales since the last payment or acknowledgement in writing of the debt. Default dates are irrelevant.

[IS IT ME?]

so 6 years even if no payment made or acknowledgement made this must be from the start of the agreement and not from the default date

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

No six years from the date of the ''cause of action'' ie the date

when a payment was ''due'' and not made and NO payments

or written acknowledgments made thereafter.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Avoidance = Procrastinating over a false reason to let a debt pass its statue barred date.

 

Statue Barred = past 5 years in Scotland and 6 years in England and Wales since the last payment or acknowledgement in writing of the debt. Default dates are irrelevant.

 

 

I think you mean statute, as in a legal authority, rather than a piece of sculpture. Getting this wrong when writing to DCAs or creditors is unlikely to show the writer in a knowledgeable light.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Exactly the content of a letter claiming that a debt is STATUTE barred

must be worded carefully to avoid any hint of admission of liabilty.